Posted on 10/04/2009 11:40:54 AM PDT by 50mm
Edited on 10/04/2009 3:31:45 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
Those who read the New York Times's coverage of the unsuccessful results of Barack and Michelle Obama's attempt to seal the 2016 Summer Olympics bid for Chicago on Friday afternoon ('For Obama, an Unsuccessful Campaign") might want to read it again.
If it doesn't seem the same, it's because it isn't.
Blogger Weasel Zippers (HT Hot Air Headlines via Instapundit) caught the Times committing a major scrub of the story. But it's really worse than that.
An excerpt of the item's first five paragraphs posted at FreeRepublic at 4:44 Eastern Time on October 2 shows that the article was apparently originally published under the same title with Peter Baker's byline Friday sometime Friday afternoon.
NYT: For Obama, An Unsuccessful Campaign ["He Could Not Even Muster The Silver Or Bronze"]
Welcome!
Not a bad guess :) Though I’ll add it may not have HAD to go all the way to The One. It could have been snagged by The Axe or The Rahm.
But it is surely one for the record books, eh?
Day after day- one outrage after another...
I keep saying I don’t believe that YOU LIE!/HolyO is going to complete this term, that he and his cronies will be impeached by the end of the year...
Any democrats who continue to back up this corrupt president will feel the backlash as well—if they’re smart they’ll start voting their consciences! WE THE PEOPLE have a looooooong memory, and now we have the internet to back us up with evidence, and proof of their corruption.
(I know it’s an oxymoron—smart congress critter! LOL!)
Quite plausible. But here’s another scenario.
The article had over 5000 hits. At some point the NYT wondered OMG- we unleashed a tsunami. What have we done they chest-beated since access was via Free Republic. NYT and WH have a symbiotic relationship. WH got wind of this. The big editorial staff was placed on red alert and a re-write was ordered. Speaking of Watergate, this is quite an editorial capital crime cover-up.
Yeah, let’s ask those 9.8% unemployed people (and you know the numbers are way higher, some pundits have said in the high teens!) how ‘successful’ YOU LIE!’s policies have been in the 10 months or so he’s been in office!
Only one change to your sequence of events. Rahmbo made the call, not Oboomba. That’s my own opinion of course.
Just as good a stab at the chain of events as mine. Whatever happened, we know the Old Grey Whore (thanks Pabiance) is in bed with Zero.
We need as many hits on this article so Pinch knows his deception didn’t work.
Thanks for letting us know about the fraud.
That is what Townhall thinks as well. This is their last paragraph. The portion I have underlined is ROTF funny!
As if the Times needed any more blows to its allegedly still-existing journalistic integrity, this one can't help but beg the question of who at the White House put pressure on the Times to do what it did. Why would any journalist put themselves in the position of making people wonder if they bow to the wishes of the politically powerful? The answer may be that journalism, once thought to be at least lurking occasionally in its Manhattan hallways, is officially dead at the New York Times.
Thanks go to Tom Blumer at NewsBusters.com.
Thanks for the addition of the post to the original FR article by Steelfish! You’re on the ball tonight, Admin Mod!
Hope NewsBusters, Townhall, and other conservative websites know about this exposure at Free Republic.
This is the problem of getting all our information from the internet. Internet news stories can be altered in an instant, whereas print remains in black and white for all time.
We shouldn't lobby for the demise of all newspapers, or this kind of revisionism will become the norm.
We should lobby for accurate newspapers.
The Admin Mod moved this from Extended News to Breaking News. It will get more exposure now.
What else can one expect from the NYP (New York Pravda)?
Yes, and the copyright restrictions put on Free Republic and other sites don't allow us to archive the original articles. Articles can be changed and we can't prove that they were changed because of threats of future lawsuits.
The real contradiction in terms was your use of the word "consciences."
Under the fair use doctrine, individuals can archive original articles. FR cannot, I believe, due to an agreement derived from a previous court case cocerning this issue.
It's probably a good idea for people to start archiving more information from these types of resources for future reference so that they can't claim it never existed.
“I suspect a call directly from Zero to Pinch caused the changes. “
I agree with you. I just reheard the actual announcement from the IOC — “Chicago, with the lowest number of votes ... “ Zero and his entourage were totally humilated AND it was not about Bush. From what I have gathered, every team, excluding Zero’s, had a ‘presentation’, not teleprompters about Me!Me!Me!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.